On Thu, 19 Feb 2015, Paul Hoffman wrote: > On Feb 19, 2015, at 10:09 AM, Sean Turner <turners@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Feb 19, 2015, at 10:16, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> I propose that this document skip PS, and go straight to Internet Standard to > >> accurately reflect the status of this document. > > > > Six months after it gets an RFC# I?d completely support this. > > Good god, no. HTTP/2 is quite complex, and it is likely that at least > some parts will turn out to be non-optimal. Please give the HTTPBIS WG > at least a year to shake out the protocol after wide deployment and > constant use. Rushing the WG just so we can feel good about slapping a > near-meaningless feel-good label on the spec is not a good process. > > Counter-proposal: we let the people closest to the protocol, the WG that > created it, decide when to ask for STD status. There are at least two design choices I wouldn't accept as final w/o real world experience. I don't want to open that discussion now but I will be watching deployement results and feedback from 'outside' implementers. No way should we jump to 'standard' now. Dave Morris